|
The thing is, I have zero faith in Blizzard's ability to comprehend that "indoctrinate" can have multiple meanings that aren't just related to brainwashing. Y'all are giving them too much credit in these interpretations.
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 11:20 |
|
|
I'm going with the majority and saying nuke those trains. And I appreciate Swann's dig on Jim.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2023 01:35
|
|
|
Kith posted:Which raises even more questions - none of which should be answered. The internet is a series of tubes, and Nova is flexible. Psion posted:Ace Combat 6 came out in like, 2007 Go dance with the angels. Redeye Flight posted:We can just opt not to do the mission until we reach the Point of No Return and proceed into the endgame, but that would mean we couldn't use the unit Haven unlocks, which is kind of important. It's not 100% irreplaceable in the campaign but it's really good at its job. I remember back in 2010 I wasn't super sold on the unit, but it grew on me over time and now I like it better than Goliaths (barring the whole shoot two things at once thing).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
Felinoid posted:I know it's been quite a while since we've done a "main" mission (Tychus's line), but they were really rubbing their chins over Kerrigan seeming to be going after the artifacts too, and now Moebius HQ is under attack by Kerrigan. So presumably she wants the macguffin pieces we've been collecting because question mark? I guess we'd have to go save Tychus's golden goose to learn more. I'm sure they'll be fine. Kerrigan will just wait patiently until we get done messing around with all the side quests. Honestly this reminds me how many games with time pressure in the narrative are allergic to including time pressure in the gameplay.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2023 04:41
|
|
|
Qwertycoatl posted:I don't think I'd like it if doing some missions made others time out. Unless the game is particularly good I'm not going to play it more than once, and also what if the units I get from the mission I did turn out to suck? It would just drive me to looking up a guide. For sure. SC2 straight up isn't built for that kind of narrative. I think it would have been cool if it was, but the campaign would have looked very different from what we got. I generally like trade-offs in games because things like Mass Effect (have enough war score) or Fable 3 (have enough money) are really only asking you to pay out-of-game time to reach the best ending state. Which isn't all that much of a choice--it just means the game is longer than it may initially look. That kind of design is never good if you're a one-and-done player though--nothing with mutual exclusivity will allow for a single-run-see-everything game. At least for me though, I'm fine with that tradeoff sometimes. VostokProgram posted:What was the time pressure thing in Skyrim? I think it was awkwardly phrased--narratively there's a time pressure in that there's dragons rampaging all over the province. Mechanically, however, you can put off even getting the flagship shout until you've cleared almost every other piece of content in the game with zero consequences. (I know this because in my first playthrough I accidentally did this.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2023 10:27
|
|
|
Regalingualius posted:Imagine I was a smartass and put an image of Jim with the face of the Detective from Disco Elysium superimposed over his (or vice versa) here This would be funny, and also Difficulty: Impossible for Blizzard to accomplish in any of its eras. Would also dovetail nicely with the scrapped 'alcoholic Jim' arc.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2023 14:21
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:It's notably hard to get right, though. Often there's either a way to "beat" the pseudo-time limit and essentially have infinite time or it's so gruelling you're locked into one optimal playstyle if you want to be able to beat the game. I would rather just have binary choices "oh no! there's only time to raid a train or save haven!!!" or a no pressure. Like, it's great when it works it just usually does not. I think binary choices work best too, unless the missions are mostly interchangeable and you're not able to accidentally get yourself into a state where you can complete part 1 of a chain but can't finish part 2 because you ran out of time. They'd also need to probably decouple unit unlocks from missions as well and put them into a point buy menu. Because otherwise you're going to run into that awful state where you picked your 8 missions out of 12 but the unit you wanted to unlock was behind the 9th and instead you got a couple units you never use. But that's at odds with what I think was a good choice (independent of execution  ) of using the mission design to showcase the unit that mission introduces...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2023 14:35
|
|
|
Grammarchist posted:I liked Battlefleet Gothic: Armada having every defeat hit hard while still technically leaving you in a winnable state. You might wind up being called up to the final battle without upgrades or capital ships, but you can try to get by with a Goonswarm of tiny torpedo boats or something. It also helps that BFGA2 is an all around solid game. I petered out before finishing it, but boy howdy does it scratch the "persistent campaign naval warfare" itch with how it models the actual space combat. Even if more than a few missions came down to me hiding my smaller fleet in dust clouds and baiting the enemy into a broadside they couldn't see coming. Though I think there's IRL precedent for that in naval warfare too...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2023 13:45
|
|
|
Kith posted:Diamondbacks are an extremely powerful unit on paper because they have the extremely rare property of being able to attack and move at the same time. The fact they are the only unit with that property more or less nullifies the niche because it can't synergize with anything else. This might be cool on an early game harassment unit (like reapers!) except that... well, it's not an early game unit and the campaign doesn't reward harassment.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2023 06:50
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Isn't just about them being an un-balanceable mess for multiplayer? I would assume that developers wouldn't understand the implication of their design until actual pro-players started playtesting with them. More or less. It's been 13 years, so my memory is fuzzy. But my recollection is that despite being a new unit they were removed from multiplayer for precisely the reason that they are impossible to balance and their playstyle was a niche looking for a problem. They more or less existed for a vision of StarCraft 2 that the developers had but just didn't playtest well. One of the things I'm looking at when I say this: PurpleXVI posted:As far as I remember, outside of artillery, most attacks in SC2 are hitscan, which also somewhat lessens the Diamondback's utility. If most units fired at where a unit was when they launched the attack, and those attacks could miss if the unit kept moving, then Diamondbacks would suddenly be units where a lot of micro could provide huge payoff. But since that's not the case... anti-artillery feels like their only real niche. As far as I recall, ALL attacks are hitscan. If a unit is targeted or in the splash when something hits, it takes damage, no save. This is almost exactly the same as StarCraft 1 with the exception that StarCraft 1 actually did have a primitive cover and miss system and StarCraft 2 did away with this. Blizzard essentially ran into the problem that any radical changes to the multiplayer/competitive systems were unlikely to be accepted by playtesters. Mechanically, only the cover/miss chance change, the ability to select everything, and units that were able to traverse cliffs made the cut as mechanical changes. I guess rich mineral fields too if you can count that. Units that could move and shoot did not pass playtesting.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
Synastren posted:A lot of units now have turret tracking (e.g., immortals, tanks) where they can keep on an acquired target while moving and/or not firing. This was generally hailed as a good set of changes. Units that don't have multiple parts (e.g., marines, reapers, hydras) can grossly minimize the time they take to activate their firing mode through proper micro. Somehow I never considered the projectile style attacks, or that you could defeat them by getting in a transport. Probably because that kind of micro seems insane to me.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2023 02:40
|
|
|
I never really got good with the micro/twitch intensive parts of SC2 multiplayer, but you can get a fair bit of mileage out of just mastering the macro side of the game. All else being equal, the bigger army usually wins, and I found it way easier to practice keeping my economy up, not stockpiling resources, and being constantly producing units. Micro helps, but good macro is your fundamental skill. And it's hilarious when you end up in a situation where you're paired against someone who doesn't have good macro skills. It quickly becomes an exercise in seal clubbing because, even if you trade evenly/have a bad engagement, your focus on economy means you bounce back faster and snowball even from losses. Some of my coworkers wanted to play against me back in the day and... it didn't go well for them purely on the fact that I was pouring out an endless stream of units and they were not. Economy is king, and will take you far.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
bladededge posted:Just getting Dark Templar out early enough caused more forfeits than anything else, in my experience. Straight-to-DT build orders worked way more frequently than they had any right to back in '99. I dunno. I exclusively played ladder. When I quit, if someone had asked me for NR20 or something like that, I'd be showing up with a 200/200 army to kick their teeth in with enough resources banked to rebuild it almost instantly... I definitely did that when I was younger though. Me playing Brood War in early middle school and me playing SC2 in college were two completely different people. Watching a lot of day9 videos in that time is probably what influenced my play the strongest and got me thinking about how to actually play SC2 on the ladder. Fun fact: Brood War taught me how to touch-type, because chicken-peck isn't going to work when you're trying to talk smack mid game.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2023 05:16
|
|
|
Hwurmp posted:two-key macros for every slur in the English language I actually got real good at talking grammatically correct smack about that weiner on your forehead.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2023 07:39
|
|
|
Kith posted:Fun Fact: This ability does... nothing! Firing on the move is a property of the Diamondback's weapon, and is a property that can be applied to any weapon with a checkbox. Since I never touched the editor tools, that makes me wonder if you can also make things like weapon damage conditional on whether it is moving or not? Like can I make it deal less damage while moving to represent 'accuracy loss'?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2023 19:01
|
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:I would assume so. You'd probably have to use two weapons and make the fire on the move one the secondary. I dunno how that would work with attack moves and stuff though. Apropos nothing, I'd assume like Wargame/WARNO: If you give the equivalent of an attack move command, they'll stop and fire once they're in range. If you give a move order, however, they'll keep moving while firing away (usually at an accuracy penalty unless you've got some killer gun stabilizers/are an airplane) Eugen games have specific toggles for rules of engagement and weapon activation though. So you can say 'don't fire unless fired upon' or turn off a weapon to keep them from wasting ammo on inaccurate shots. And plenty of weapons like ATGMs can't be fired on the move for various reasons. tl;dr: the AI treats stopping and firing as the priority option Kith posted:Yes, rather easily. The Galaxy Editor is powerful enough to do literally anything. And I do mean "literally anything" - there are multiple FPSes and Platformers and Kart games and pretty much everything you can imagine floating around the Arcade.  I feel like I missed out quitting when I did and not giving non-ladder multiplayer modes/maps a try.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2023 00:36
|
|
|
Kith posted:I haven't heard of Legion TD, but I was thinking about Line Wars TD where the gribblies you were TDing against were sent by other players. Ok. I'll say it. I miss HotS.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2023 21:26
|
|
|
WE DIG GIANT ROBOTS CHICKS DIG GIANT ROBOTS Air support is for cowards who can't stomp on cars with giant robot legs.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2023 07:14
|
|
|
I kinda like the hollow victory depressed Kerrigan idea. It doesn't even need to be that elaborate--it works fine without needing to change much else about her because the most believable part is that someone who is wondering what the point of it all is, now that there's no pressing crisis to draw her attention, would absolutely withdraw inward and not do much. And because the Zerg is a hive mind, her mental state makes the rest of the swarm lethargic, giving the Terrans and Protoss breathing room until something (the Xel'Naga/Mengsk) starts presenting a crisis again and gives her an external motivator. It's a cool idea based in some well-trod mental health topics, which means Blizzard absolutely doesn't have the chops to implement it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2023 15:25
|
|
|
All that is a shame because hoverbike should immediately trigger the "cool and good" portion of the lizard brain, but the vulture is just kinda undertuned for it. I disagree with the Hellion take though. At least, my memory of WoL Ladder play supported Hellions as being pretty solid. Hellions suck is a problem for the campaign, for mission structure reasons that have already been litigated. In a competitive match, I'd take the Hellion over the Vulture because my biggest problem to solve with that slot in the comp is piles of zerglings or zealots locking down my tanks and thors. Having something with AOE damage against light that can kill several units in a single shot dramatically improves the survivability of my tanks and thors. Does gently caress-all to counter Immortals, sure. But nothing in the terran mech bucket does that--you splash in Ghosts for EMP if you need something to deal with their shields. (And IMO if you're facing protoss without ghosts for an opening EMP salvo, you're missing out. This was my standard procedure whenever I got into a TvP matchup, whether I was going bio or mech.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2023 17:30
|
|
|
All those floating resources make me twitchy. Just 5k sitting in the bank. Dayum shame. I know this isn't a sweaty LP, I'm just so used to 'floating resources are not killing the enemy' that it is reflexive. I spent a lot of time when I was playing SC2 just getting into the habit of always be building something when I had the minerals/gas, and if I started building up a bank, that meant I needed to build more production structures to spend that bank as fast as I got it. This made Brutal very easy to complete.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2023 05:21
|
|
|
Faint praise, but the Legacy of the Void upgrade to the Hellion to give it a transformation mode was a good choice. I think it gets its distinction there, at least from a unit design standpoint--hell yeah, an honest-to-god Transformer. I didn't do much competitive LoV, though, so I can't comment on its actual effectiveness. But this is a WoL LP, not LoV, so we're stuck with the unflavored oatmeal of the Hellion, which while technically still having its niche as a light unit killer, suffers the indignity of harassment just frankly not being possible in most missions, putting it in the same shallow grave as the Reaper. For the Wraith itself, I think there's a lot of nostalgia wrapped up in it that is perhaps undeserved. I remember thinking it cool in Brood War as a middle schooler, and being excited to have it for at least the campaign in SC2. But overtime, I found myself not really missing it, or using it in subsequent playthroughs. As Blaze points out, it's just bad. The Banshee does cloaked harassment better, and the Viking does air-to-air better, with the Viking even having its walker mode to assist with ground targets. Sure, you gotta transform it, which exposes it to ground-based attacks, but once I got the hang of the micro, it felt so much better to use than the Wraith. Brood War was so long ago for me that it may have been better in that game, but from a Starcraft 2 perspective, I think the decision to cut it from the competitive roster and relegate it to campaign only was a good one. The two units we got for the trouble both have great identity and do the respective roles much better anyhow.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2023 09:41
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:Starcraft 3: Jimmy Starcraft touches the evil space rock and becomes the evil corrupted space man, can the uncorrupted spacemen save Jimmy Starcraft in time? Also, we retconned it so the Zerg were an ancient race of philosopher kings, spending their time in meditation, prior to the Xel'Naga interference, Kerrigan goes on a vision quest to learn more about them. Zeratul sorts his dead toenail collection, finds one of them missing, swears epic vengeance and tells everyone the world is about to end. Turns out he's just gotten into the moonshine again. But enough about Warcraft.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
Aces High posted:Starcraft 3: Ragnasaur Eater (or Kakaru, or Ursadon, whichever of the map critters are most memorable) This is just Heart of the Swarm.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2023 05:20
|
|
|
Hwurmp posted:once every 24 hours he has to input a word from a random page of the operator's manual, or the killswitch activates I think this is a lot of ask of a Dominion Marine, let alone Tychus. Of course, the real reason Tychus doesn't get his leash yanked is explained in the final mission and alluded to by Cradok: He's literally a missile with a mouth. His job is to kill Kerrigan. That's 'the deal' as it were. Which is funny, because Tychus is the exact kind of person, as evidenced by his little tour of the logs about the Queen of Blades, to take this job blind. I legitimately think he had no idea what he was agreeing to. He knows what murder is, and his brain meat can conceptualize that. He doesn't understand the full implication of some infested Ghost with her psionic powers jacked to the nines and an uncountable hivemind at her beck and call. Killing Raynor just straight up isn't his problem, and Mengsk isn't expecting him to. Was this a smart plan by Mengsk? Maybe the Blizz writing team thought it was but... uh... Starcraft does a bad job of selling Mengsk as the master strategist.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2023 21:45
|
|
|
the Orb of Zot posted:Regarding that endgame twist that you probably figured out already I have a hard time putting my finger on exactly what parts give me this feeling, but Heart and Legacy both leave me feeling like the writers, rather than working from a coherent story outline and plot, were making it up as each game was greenlit. The artifact just feels like plot keys the writers reached for when they needed some glue to hold their TOTALLY COOL ORIGINAL STORY PLOT together. It's a zerg-zapper! It cures Kerrigan! Wait no, it stole Kerrigan's power and transferred it to Amon! It's also a map! And an anti-radiation shield! And a god-soul-vacuum! gently caress me running, can it make coffee and give me a foot massage too? I think, as stories, the SC2 plots are all less than the sum of their parts. Also gently caress you Bisby, this stupid LP made me interested in playing SC2 again and I'm just wrapping up Legacy. Fortunately (?) I bought all the poo poo except Nova years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2023 19:59
|
|
|
Xarn posted:Same and same. All I can say is that the gameplay itself still holds up. No notes, SC/BW/2 are the gold standard of RTS gameplay in my opinion. Its very simple at the highest level, with complexity coming from how all the simple parts interact. The problem, I think, I have with the campaigns is that they're fundamentally not "Starcraft." The symptoms of this are things like Hellions being near-useless in the campaign because there's no opportunities for harassment to get ahead. Why? Because assuming the computer has a base on the map at all, it starts as a late-game death base while you're starting from what is only slightly better than the 5 workers 1 HQ start of a melee match. There's no opportunity in the campaign for a lot of the match-defining actions of a melee match like scouting and harassment to pay off. It's very rare where a campaign mission even gives you an expansion base location (natural or otherwise), let alone a need to actually build the expansion. Heart and Legacy are a bit better about this than Wings, but uh... looking at it from this perspective, I think I understand where the "no rush" custom game style came from. If you only play the campaign, then jump straight into ladder/semi-competitive play, you WILL get your rear end beat just by the fact that the campaign doesn't really teach you to play Starcraft--it teaches you to play the campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
DTurtle posted:One of the smarter decisions Blizzard made with Starcraft 2 was to largely separate the single player and the multiplayer portions of the game. In fact, I would say that they didn’t go far enough in some cases - in later missions you should just start with fully built out bases, enough workers, etc. I agree with this, actually. Especially the "didn't go far enough." In hindsight, I'm also looking at a game mode made a decade ago. After starting skirmish/multiplayer up again, things are pretty wildly different from how they were back then. (Rip 6-pool) That said, I do stand by the idea that single player as a whole should teach the core mechanics of the competitive game, OR make no pretense about not doing so. Starcraft in particular is a weird game to say "the vast majority of players don't enjoy anyway." At least not without something to back up that assertion--Starcraft is up there in the pantheon of "games people really like for competitive play" and is one of the founding 'esports' titles back in the bloody 1990s. The game was a famously competitive draw when the options for that were basically quake, counterstrike, and fighting games. Custom maps have always been a core of Blizzard's RTS games, for sure, but versus matches (ranked or otherwise, traditional or no-rush) are just as big. Even looking at the campaign through the lens of 10 years ago, it's an unhappy medium between fully curated custom experience that focuses on big-fight gameplay and a versus-like experience that forces the player into an abbreviated early-game macro experience. It ends up being an unsatisfying mix of needing to macro up in a way that doesn't quite make sense for folks who have experience with the multiplayer aspect and delays the gratification of smashing your toy soldiers against the computer's toy soliders for no good reason. That said, this criticism is only applicable to versus-like missions. No-build missions and 'holdouts' I think are their own category--the latter of which got its own game mode? Which is pretty cool.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2023 07:39
|
|
|
mr_stibbons posted:Finding decade old internet articles is a nightmare, but I recall back at launch there were statistics released that about half of the people who bought starcraft 2 on launch never played a single game of multiplayer, and the active multiplayer community was less than 10%. Now, stats are deceptive, a fair amount of pepole probably dropped the game pretty quickly, things may have changed since 2013, but it is fair to say that multiplayer is niche compared to campaign. Huh. That's interesting. I missed out on SC/BW competitive because I was very young and didn't have the mindset to enjoy the process of trying to get better. By the time SC2 came out, I was midway through college, and was enamored with the idea of finally having a competitive multiplayer game in a genre I could play well--I never had the passion for twitch-shooters or fighting games. So I went into SC2 with full intent to play ladder. And according to bnet stats I did hit platinum before quitting, so I guess I was doing something right. I'm always interested in attrition stats though, since I'd expect that number to increase over time due to attrition of single-player gamers moving on to other games while committed multiplayer players remain behind. But yeah, that conclusion probably holds water. Might also be falling for the 'distraction' of the bright spotlight on the esports aspect. It makes me wonder about other 'competitive' darling games like League that offer popular non-competitive game modes.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2023 16:09
|
|
|
ulmont posted:I grabbed the Hive Mind Emulator and used it ok, but after learning I had to actively cast it and pay attention to where units and emulators were I really wished I'd gone with the Psi Disruptor instead. I almost always take Psi Disruptor. Mind control IS impactful--with the Ultralisk example, you one-clicked the Ultra off the board, while at the same time disrupting the attacker's DPS and maybe killing some more attacking units. But that's one specific example with an outsized impact--it scales to the value of the unit that you mind control. If the attacks are nothing but ling and hydralisk... well, it's pretty meh. The Disruptor on the other hand applies its effect to all units every time. You don't lose effectiveness if the wave doesn't contain anything big and scary to mind control, and you don't need to dedicate thought to using another caster unit when you're dealing with multiple fronts. Which you will be in the missions these are useful in.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
lol, I just noticed some lazy graphical detail The goddamn greeble decal is backwards.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2023 06:09
|
|
|
aniviron posted:You can see a few things like that in the intro cutscene as well. I believe that the texture is mirrored across the model to optimize. Almost certainly, but blind mirroring would also probably result in the 435 being backwards as well. No one caught the small text decal though. Or they figured no one would notice/it was too small to bother with. edit: This is not the only game with this problem by a long shot, but Blizzard presumably has a better QA team than, say, the folks behind Captain of Industry. Warmachine fucked around with this message at 08:33 on Sep 29, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2023 08:07
|
|
|
aniviron posted:I think it's also part of Blizzard's obsession with optimizing, too. I haven't played a Blizzard game since... well, since Wings of Liberty actually, but goddamn could those old games run on terrible PCs. When I was a kid, my best friend & dumpster dived some old office PCs and set them up; they were terrible but the one thing they could run was Brood War so we called the ones we built Starcraft computers. SC2 was similarly well-optimized, and it's the insane/anal attention to detail on things like UV maps optimizing for video memory that does it. I put WC3 onto a netbook back when those hadn't been entirely killed as a concept by tablets. The shittiest Atom processor and memory available could still play Frozen Throne passably. Torrannor posted:World of Warcraft is also playable on some really crappy PCs, this is definitely one area where you have to "hand it" to Blizz. Dril tweet.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2023 11:50
|
|
|
Kith posted:The Secret Mission is basically a showcase of the Weird poo poo You Can Get Up To In The Galaxy Editor, so that's 100% my vote. I'm also voting Secret Mission because delaying Haven is a meme and it'll get us the last bit of research we need for Tech Reactors.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2023 06:47
|
|
|
I'm pleasantly surprised by the Co-op mode. It actually lets you have some of the fun campaign units in a more general format, and makes Firebats not as bad. Not really relevant to the LP, but at someone who never tried it before it's nice to see. Jim just needs to keep his opinions about acceptable losses to himself. So what if I'm treating marines like zerglings and sending them to their deaths in scores? "We lost a lot of good people there." Mind your business Jimmy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
gohuskies posted:Blizz clearly realized that there was too much mission choice in WOL and it was hurting the story, because they cut it down in HotS and LotV. I don't recall LotV as well but in Heart, you get to choose between mission chains but once you're in a chain, you're going all the way through it before you get to switch to a new one. Heart and Legacy both have the same structure here. The big difference is you do have to complete everything (I think) to start the final mission chain. Add me to the list of people who swore they heard about the protoss justification some 13 years ago, but memory is dumb and also suggestion is a thing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
Haven was the original benchwarmer, and it won't be getting off that bench if I have anything to say about it. Shame about the Vikings though. They're kinda cool. Oh well, the Hercules is about to be obsolete. As if it was ever relevant.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2023 09:06
|
|
|
BisbyWorl posted:Noted, went back and fixed it. And that's not even getting into the concept of co-op, which is like Blizzard took the campaign and skirmish rules and smashed them together into a strangely compelling format which wouldn't work for versus but is great for letting two people use fun toys against the AI. Seriously, I'm not comfortable with how much I'm actually enjoying co-op--moreso even than ladder. Once again, if not for Bisby, I'd have not given SC2 a second look in 2023, and yet here I am wasting hours on a ten year old RTS game from the sex pest company.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
BisbyWorl posted:Okay I think you're all getting a bit too ahead of yourselves. Quoting for posterity.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2023 19:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 11:20 |
|
|
Xarn posted:It's not really a spoiler to say that we will fight Kerrigan again, and she is scary as gently caress there (unless you are going for massive levels of cheese with ghosts). They could have fixed it by just taking her unit off the map while she's 'in' a building checking it. Keep the map marker, keep the shaking building, just remove her token to represent that she's inside the building and can't deal with whatever is outside.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2023 16:54
|
|